UrS4

Well, there is sort of. It's mostly a bunch of PR stuff but on the Velocity channel a while back, a show about Team Shelby was introducing the new GT350. The car was a stage III variant with a supercharged 5.0 with about 634 Hp. It was pitted against a C6 Z06, Porsche 911 turbo, Ferrari F430 Scuderria, Lamborghini Gallardo Superlegga. The competitors were slightly modified and driven by their owners who supposedly had varying degrees or road racing/track experience. The course was a road course with a blend of tight turns and descents straights. The Shelby was driven by their hot shoe car developer. Anyways the mustang creamed all of them buy several seconds claiming that all this power and finess could be had for less than the Z06.

From an analytical standpoint it was crap. Tires were different, driver ability was different, and course familiarity was different. And almost no real data was collected or shared with the audience except for lap times. All in the favor of mustang. But you left saying wow, the mustang platform is solid enough to hang and easily beat super cars!!

I'm sure in a mustang mag there has got to be a review of a Roush mustang, which I would say is the closest one would get to a complete aftermarket mustang with enough credit to actually warrant a performance review by a legitimate mag. I mean, MT is not going to find an average Joe with the basic bolt ons and run it against a Camaro 1LE.

Come to think of it, this very same concept is actually a show starting on Velocity later this month, called so you think you are faster than a redneck. Where good ole (modified) American muscle is raced against high end foreign cars to disprove that American cars are only a one trick pony (pun intended).

eolson

That would be a dream, to actually see a basic budget of bolt ons that would still be less added to the cost of a Mustang GT than the total cost of many of the cars that come with all the goodies from the factory.

I would love to see a properly fit out Mustang: Springs, shocks, swaybars, STB, g-trac bar, shock tower brace, rear LCR's, a Watts Link, X-brace, brake duct venting(added to big brakes), some basic chassis stiffening, wide wheels 9's & 10's, wide sticky tires 305 rear, 275 front, more open H pipe, exhaust, high performance tune, cold air kit. Let's say and added 12-14 K in aftermarket parts and installation,on top of the Mustang GT's cost.

Then we would actually see the Mustang matched with the parts that the other companies put on their cars from the factory. I would love to see the results of those side to side comparison's. Lot's of people would say that's what the Boss 302 LS is, so what's the point? To me the point is that the Mustang's price point comes at the sacrifice of 14K of missing bolt ons and better wider rubber to actually perform to the car's potential.

Roush does not do that much to the car to declare it "all fit out" frankly. They do the minimum, and charge a hell of a lot for it. Erik

UrS4

Sounds like you want a mag to pit your car against a Camaro 1LE. Honestly though, even if they compared your proposed mustang against its factory competition, in the real word, it's just bench racing. I would put more stock in what type of cars you can beat on a road course. Having a car that has numbers that should beat everything isn't as impressive, to me, as going out and actually beating the competition. True, driver skill can make up for a lot, but I'd rather have fun running away from the competition rather than claiming to be a paper champion.

eolson

That's the whole point, simply fitting out the Mustang GT properly with commonly available aftermarket items, to have the car reasonably reach it's maximum potential, just as Chevy has done to the standard Camaro, with the 1LE package.

It is not bench racing to fit a car out with commonly agreed, balanced , bolt on items and properly offset wider wheels and wider grippy tires. Ford has not done this with the Mustang GT, IMO. I'm pretty sure real Mustang race shops, and real Mustang competition drivers have solved or greatly reduced the specific problems the Mustang GT with the current track pack is still suffering from, using the common items listed above. So why isn't Ford offering these solutions as an actual track pack upgrade??

Clearly the difference between how the Mustang GT with the track pack performed in the MT article, and many other tests, and how Mustang GT's with additional items such as wider rubber, lateral movement elimination with the Watts Link, and simple additional chassis stiffening, is a measurable side by side difference. We simply are never seeing a more reasonably fit out Mustang actually tested side to side with the lame track pack Ford offers. That's my point.

It is not an unreasonable suggestion with the largest aftermarket in the world, that in one of the numerous Mustang Magazines, that the Mustang GT with a complete after market fit out for an additional 10K or so, on top of the initial price, be tested against a stock Mustang GT, and a Track Pack Mustang GT. This would give truly objective side by side comparisons to 3 levels of the car.

Clearly, Chevy is willing to do this with the Camaro. Same car, fit out to the determined max to perform better at the track. Ford, holding back as always, giving us a few bolt ons, and not solving the cars performance issues for the track after 8 years of production. That's all. Erik